So I'm thinking: Do people do this intentionally as a way to get the other member of a couple to end the relationship? The person who gets the divorce papers handed to them can then portray themselves as the victim. How often does that happen?

Contempt (e.g. mockery, eye-rolling) is most powerful. Why? It tells the receiver you feel disgust.

Subjects who were asked to suppress their disgust when shown images of, for example, a dirty toilet or a film depicting an amputation were able to do so. ‘But the emotion then found its way into the open through other channels’, says Grob. ‘At the cognitive level, they began to think about disgusting things much more often and also felt much more negatively about other issues. The same phenomenon occurs in a situation where you are not allowed to think of something, say a white bear. Precisely because you are trying to suppress that thought, it becomes hyperaccessible’.

Of course, if you just do not get married in the first place you can more assuredly avoid divorce court.

What I'm curious to know: How often do either men or women sabotage their relationship with the above techniques so they can get the other person to end it?

Hmm. Those are more or less the *symptoms* that the guy looks for in the context of the two partners talking to each other. It's not at all clear to me that those behaviors in and of themselves will lead to a marriage ending; they just show that the people involved would probably like the marriage to end since at least one of them really doesn't like the other. I don't think people deliberately sabotage their relationships via any of these things. Anyway, if you wanted to egg someone into filing for divorce I think you'd need stronger measures than any of these mere attitudes in order to do the job in a timely way (not that it wouldn't work eventually). Anecdotally I know a couple of cases of guys who more or less forced their wives to file for divorce just by sleeping around a bunch and not hiding it.

Great post. I think it has now become impossible to know who the real victim is. Most judges and juries always blame the man, specially if he is strong, manly, outgoing, sexually healthy and all those qualities women say admire in men. It's the eternal castration game women love to play on men. Perhaps that's why we have so many kids with homosexual tendencies. Castrating mothers will always turn their kids into queers, and that's a fact.

Women's types of violence are much more subtle. I would add a few to Randall's 4 above, like silence and childish behavior, that is, returning silence when she's required to give an answer, or childishness when she is spected to act as an adult, oversimplifications when it suits her, or "tennis" games, by which I mean taking equal revenge in every mistake the man makes on her, so that she does it back to him as a way to compensate, or when she refuses to ever sweep, mop do the dishes or make the bed when she is perfectly able, just because "she is not told what to do" instead of doing it because it is necessary whether she has to be told or not. E T C

The sad thing is that they don't even know why they do it. This is sadly true, and I'm not talking bullshit. Let's remember for example, that the best gynecologists have been usually men, why? because men know the woman's body better than she knows it. Just ask any woman if she's even able to see her own vagina? Many women can't even tell whether they've ever had an orgasm or not. Nope, not even that.

Why do they say do not try to understand women? ? ? Because it is impossible to understand a contradiction. However, men can also turn that around if they were a little smarter, by asking that same question to their women when they are asking their men to understand them: "Do you understand yourself honey?" "Don't." "Don't try to understand yourself dear, and please don't expect me to understand you if you cannot make yourself clear, princess" Or something to that effect.